Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions

COST vs PEP

Costco Wholesale Corporation versus PepsiCo, Inc. — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.

COST wins 3–2 on our six-dimension comparison, but PEP can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

Scorecard at a glance

Dimension	COST	PEP	Winner
Yield	0.56%	4.22%	PEP wins
Dividend safety	8.3/10	6.3/10	COST wins
Growth trend	-0.04% vs 5y	+1.19% vs 5y	COST wins
Volatility (beta)	0.91	0.37	PEP wins
Scale	$465.4B	$190.6B	COST wins
Tax efficiency	Qualified-eligible	Qualified-eligible	Tie
Overall	3 wins	2 wins	COST wins

Dimension by dimension

PEP wins on yield (4.22% vs 0.56%)

On a $10,000 investment that's about $366 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

PEP's higher yield (4.22%) looks attractive but investors should weigh whether the extra income compensates for any additional risk versus COST's 0.56% — especially if the higher yield is driven by covered calls or a falling share price.

COST: 0.56%PEP: 4.22%

COST wins on safety (8.3/10 vs 6.3/10)

Our score combines yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size. COST scores better on the weighted average of those factors.

COST (8.3/10) scores 2.0 points higher than PEP (6.3/10). A higher safety score means lower historical indicators of dividend cut risk — payout ratio, yield zone, and trend all factor in.

COST: 8.3/10PEP: 6.3/10

COST shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend

COST's yield is 0.04% below its 5y average, versus 1.19% for PEP. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.

COST: -0.04% vs 5yPEP: +1.19% vs 5y

PEP is less volatile (beta 0.37 vs 0.91)

Lower beta means smaller swings vs the S&P 500 — generally a steadier hold for income investors.

COST: 0.91PEP: 0.37

COST is 2.4× larger by market cap

Larger companies tend to have tighter spreads, deeper liquidity, and lower closure risk.

COST: $465.4BPEP: $190.6B

Both pay qualified-dividend-eligible distributions

Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.

COST: Qualified-eligiblePEP: Qualified-eligible

How we compare these

Every comparison on this page is computed from current public data, not written by hand. Yield comes from the most recent dividend distribution annualized over current price. Safety scores combine yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size — see our methodology for the exact formula. Tax-efficiency flags identify covered-call ETFs, REITs, and mREITs which distribute primarily as ordinary income.

This is educational, not investment advice.Scores reflect a snapshot of public data on the "as of" dates shown on each ticker's safety page. Verify on the issuer's investor relations page or your brokerage before making decisions.

Frequently asked

Which is better for income, COST or PEP?

COST wins 3–2 on our six-dimension comparison, but PEP can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

COST vs PEP: which has a higher dividend yield?

COST yields 0.56% and PEP yields 4.22%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $366 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

Is COST or PEP a safer dividend in 2026?

COST scores 8.3/10 (Strong) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. PEP scores 6.3/10 (Mixed). COST is the safer pick on our scoring model.

Which has better dividend growth, COST or PEP?